Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) vs Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA (FMS) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | UHS | 9.7% revenue growth vs FMS's 1.5% |
| Value | UHS | Lower P/E (8.8x vs 9.9x), PEG 0.55 vs 1.94 |
| Quality / Margins | UHS | 8.6% net margin vs FMS's 5.0% |
| Stability / Safety | FMS | Beta 0.40 vs UHS's 0.69 |
| Dividends | UHS | 0.4% yield; 1-year raise streak; FMS pays no meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | UHS | +18.1% vs FMS's +0.2% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | UHS | 9.6% ROA vs FMS's 3.2%, ROIC 12.4% vs 5.6% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
Growth exposure
Long-term compounding (10Y)
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
Valuation efficiency (growth/$)
Defensive / Recession hedge
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
Universal Health Services is a major hospital operator that owns and runs acute care hospitals alongside behavioral health facilities across the U.S. and internationally. It generates revenue primarily from patient services—split roughly 60% from acute care and 40% from behavioral health—with payments coming from government programs, private insurers, and self-pay patients. The company's scale and geographic diversification across hundreds of facilities create operational efficiencies and a stable revenue base that smaller regional operators cannot match.
Fresenius Medical Care is a global leader in dialysis care and products for patients with chronic kidney failure. It generates revenue through two main segments: dialysis services (about 75% of revenue) from its network of outpatient clinics and hospital contracts, and dialysis products (about 25%) including machines, dialyzers, and related supplies. The company's key advantage is its vertically integrated model—combining clinics, products, and services—which creates patient stickiness and economies of scale in the capital-intensive dialysis industry.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
UHS leads in 4 of 6 categories (Financial Metrics, Valuation Metrics). FMS leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
Financial Metrics (TTM)
FMS and UHS operate at a comparable scale, with $19.6B and $17.4B in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 8.6% (UHS) to 5.0% (FMS). On growth, UHS holds the edge at +9.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | UHSUniversal Health … | FMSFresenius Medical… |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $17.4B | $19.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.6B | $3.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.5B | $978M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $831M | $1.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +67.0% | +25.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.5% | +9.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +8.6% | +5.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.8% | +6.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.1% | -0.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +41.3% | +8.5% |
Valuation Metrics
At 8.9x trailing earnings, UHS trades at a 25% valuation discount to FMS's 11.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), UHS offers better value at 0.56x vs FMS's 2.32x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | UHSUniversal Health … | FMSFresenius Medical… |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3M | $13.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.0B | $24.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 8.92x | 11.84x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 8.80x | 9.89x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.56x | 2.32x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 1.93x | 6.33x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.00x | 0.59x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.79x | 0.81x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 0.00x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
UHS delivers a 20.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $20 in annual profit, vs $7 for FMS. UHS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.70x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FMS's 0.76x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), UHS scores 7/9 vs FMS's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | UHSUniversal Health … | FMSFresenius Medical… |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +20.1% | +6.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +9.6% | +3.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +12.4% | +5.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +16.2% | +6.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.70x | 0.76x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $5.0B | $9.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $138M | $1.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $5.2B | $10.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 9.66x | 6.84x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in UHS five years ago would be worth $16,427 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,718 for FMS. Over the past 12 months, UHS leads with a +18.1% total return vs FMS's +0.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors UHS at 16.0% vs FMS's 9.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | UHSUniversal Health … | FMSFresenius Medical… |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -6.3% | -0.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +18.1% | +0.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +56.1% | +29.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +64.3% | -22.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +92.1% | -28.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.0% | +9.1% |
Risk & Volatility
FMS is the less volatile stock with a 0.40 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than UHS's 0.69 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. UHS currently trades 83.7% from its 52-week high vs FMS's 77.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | UHSUniversal Health … | FMSFresenius Medical… |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.69x | 0.40x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $246.33 | $30.46 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $152.33 | $20.95 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +83.7% | +77.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 36.4 | 49.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 578K | 518K |
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates UHS as "Hold" and FMS as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 19.4% upside for FMS (target: $28) vs 19.2% for UHS (target: $246). UHS is the only dividend payer here at 0.39% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | UHSUniversal Health … | FMSFresenius Medical… |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $245.67 | $28.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 43 | 18 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.4% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.80 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +100.0% | 0.0% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Mar 20 | Feb 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Universal Health Se… (UHS) | 100 | 153.13 | +53.1% |
| Fresenius Medical C… (FMS) | 100 | 56.36 | -43.6% |
Universal Health Se… (UHS) returned +64% over 5 years vs Fresenius Medical C… (FMS)'s -23%. A $10,000 investment in UHS 5 years ago would be worth $16,427 today (including dividends reinvested).
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Universal Health Se… (UHS) | $9.8B | $17.4B | +77.8% |
| Fresenius Medical C… (FMS) | $17.0B | $19.6B | +15.3% |
Universal Health Services, Inc.'s revenue grew from $9.8B (2016) to $17.4B (2025) — a 6.6% CAGR. Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA's revenue grew from $17.0B (2016) to $19.6B (2025) — a 1.6% CAGR.
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Universal Health Se… (UHS) | 7.2% | 8.6% | +19.2% |
| Fresenius Medical C… (FMS) | 6.9% | 5.0% | -28.2% |
Universal Health Services, Inc.'s net margin went from 7% (2016) to 9% (2025). Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA's net margin went from 7% (2016) to 5% (2025).
Chart 4P/E Ratio History — 9 Years
| Stock | 2017 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Universal Health Se… (UHS) | 14.5 | 9.4 | -35.2% |
| Fresenius Medical C… (FMS) | 25.3 | 14.2 | -43.9% |
Universal Health Services, Inc. has traded in a 9x–16x P/E range over 9 years; current trailing P/E is ~9x. Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA has traded in a 10x–39x P/E range over 9 years; current trailing P/E is ~12x.
Chart 5EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2016 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Universal Health Se… (UHS) | 7.14 | 23.1 | +223.5% |
| Fresenius Medical C… (FMS) | 1.87 | 1.68 | -10.2% |
Universal Health Services, Inc.'s EPS grew from $7.14 (2016) to $23.10 (2025) — a 14% CAGR. Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA's EPS grew from $1.87 (2016) to $1.68 (2025) — a -1% CAGR.
Chart 6Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
Universal Health Services, Inc. generated $849M FCF in 2025 (+2929% vs 2021). Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA generated $0M FCF in 2025 (-100% vs 2021).
UHS vs FMS: Frequently Asked Questions
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is UHS or FMS a better buy right now?
Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) offers the better valuation at 8.9x trailing P/E (8.8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) a "Hold" — based on 43 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — UHS or FMS?
On trailing P/E, Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) is the cheapest at 8.9x versus Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA at 11.8x. On forward P/E, Universal Health Services, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8.8x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Universal Health Services, Inc. wins at 0.55x versus Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA's 1.94x — a PEG below 1.0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — UHS or FMS?
Over the past 5 years, Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) delivered a total return of +64.3%, compared to -22.8% for Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA (FMS). A $10,000 investment in UHS five years ago would be worth approximately $16K today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: UHS returned +92.1% versus FMS's -28.5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — UHS or FMS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA (FMS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.40β versus Universal Health Services, Inc.'s 0.69β — meaning UHS is approximately 72% more volatile than FMS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 70% versus 76% for Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which has better profit margins — UHS or FMS?
Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) is the more profitable company, earning 8.6% net margin versus 5.0% for Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA — meaning it keeps 8.6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UHS leads at 11.5% versus 9.3% for FMS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — UHS leads at 67.0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
06Is UHS or FMS more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential. By this metric, Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0.55x versus Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA's 1.94x. A PEG below 1.0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) trades at 8.8x forward P/E versus 9.9x for Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA — 1.1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FMS: 19.4% to $28.00.
07Which pays a better dividend — UHS or FMS?
In this comparison, UHS (0.4% yield) pays a dividend. FMS does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is UHS or FMS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA (FMS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.40)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (FMS: -28.5%, UHS: +92.1%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
09What are the main differences between UHS and FMS?
Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that beat both.